Enlightening Nonsense

I received an email from Gary in which he said that I looked like Jesus in a particular photo—because you know how it is, anyone with long hair and a beard is put into the “Jesus Category,” forgetting the fact that this was a pretty common look back in J.C.’s day. He asked if I was channeling Jesus and, knowing this fellow a bit, I am pretty certain his opinion of channeling is that it is about someone either aggrandizing his purse or his ego. I wrote him back, “I don’t need to channel Jesus. I am Jesus.”

There’s probably not a devout fake Christian out there who wouldn’t take what I wrote as blasphemous. But what I said was giving Jesus more respect and love than could be achieved by any amount of prostrations. I see beyond the soul encased in a meat suit, beyond the personality expressed through his words and actions and to the core of Who He Was. And he was God.

By that, I don’t mean to endorse the fake Christian story of a divine being impregnating a woman without her permission [see “God The Rapist” http://rebelyogi.com/god-the-rapist.html] and coming into being in the form of a man to somehow save the sins of man based on a logic system whose final debating point usually amounts to, “Because the Bible says so,” which is barely one step away from plugging one’s ears and shouting, “I AM NOT LISTENING TO YOU!”

We are all part of the Ocean of God, be us an individual wave, a stingray or a piece of plankton. And that goes for all of us, from the saint to the sinner—which in most cases is the same person. To go back to the ocean metaphor, whether you are a stingray that buries himself in the sand or one that buries your spike into “The Crocodile Hunter” Steve Irwin’s heart, no action or personality will separate you from being a part of the ocean.

The following is an email exchange that took place between Gary and myself. I only wrote three email responses to his litany of questions but it has been rearranged to put it in the form of a back and forth dialogue and differentiating coloring is used for clarity. Misspellings and poor grammar and sentence form were kept and only a few words were eliminated that didn’t serve the whole. One word at the end was changed from “logic” to “understanding”—and I put this in brackets to indicate as such—only to better clarify what Jesus meant: Your arguments are so devoid of [understanding] that it is clear that you prefer philosophical masturbation to actual self-discovery.

I want to make clear that when I “channel” I never claim to fully know whether it is the actual being coming through me or if it is my own Higher Self or intuition guiding the answers. What is a common experience is that the information flows through me quickly without me having to “think” about the responses and often the “answers” are not what I expected.

As “Jesus” said in the second email to Gary:

These responses took me about 2-minutes to write, only because there were so many passages you wanted me to address. When you are connected to Truth, or you may call it “God,” you don’t have to memorize answers; they are always available. I am afraid all my teachings are about transforming the man, not memorizing more useless “law.” You have not worked on transforming yourself and so, like most, you try to apply your own understandings to what I have said and what is written about me and thereby miss me.

It seems that what is called “education” and “learning” today is really just memorization and recitation. Like a computer, the question is typed into the mainframe through words and the computer spits out its answer not based on some algorithm but in a cut-and-paste fashion, spitting out pieces of data that have been inserted there by a programmer. Perhaps the programmer came to the inputted data through his own experience and self-discovery. But like the computer, the person reciting the borrowed knowledge remains unchanged.

I remember one time asking in meditation the immortal yogi, Babaji, what was my purpose in this life, my ego expecting to receive an answer like, “Why, to be the greatest healer on the planet and to raise human consciousness to heights never seen before or since, of course!” Instead I received without pause, “To move from the third chakra to the fourth,” which translated from New Age parlance means, “To shift from a focus on forcing your will, to one of living through your heart.”

Despite researching at the best universities in the country and at the Library of Congress and the Internet, it seems that teaching was not available in any textbook for my parusal. Perhaps it is time to open ourselves to a greater source of teaching and understanding than that which is contained in the books of man. You have about as much of a chance of understanding life through dusty textbooks as you do of understanding a man through his obituary…because you are seeking understanding through the words when its hiding place is in the spaces.

And so the dialogue…

GARY:

Channeling Jesus?

ME:

I don’t need to channel Jesus. I am Jesus.

GARY:

Of course you are. Now, please explain the true relationship between you and Judas.  I also want to know how two fish and a loaf of bread can feed a multitude (of course define multitude)

I Thank you mostly kindly….

JESUS:

Judas was my dear friend. He had frustrations with some of the direction of the mission but, ultimately, carried on our agreement, understanding that he would be brandished the traitor but that this was on some level necessary. He made much more of a sacrifice than I did.

The “two fish and a loaf of bread” is not meant to be taken literally. It symbolizes that everyone was invited to eat and not just the “elite” or those with material wealth on the physical plane. On the spiritual plane, it means that all have access to the teachings.

GARY:

Hmmmm….  took ya awhile on that one Sparky.

JESUS:

I answered your questions when I received them from start to finish in about 30-seconds. I may be a man of miracles but even I can’t move any faster than that.

GARY:

But, it ain’t flying…Let’s look at the shenanigans at that last supper party.  Ya know, the ALL MALE soiree…If one reads John, especially the 25th verse, it says:

13:23

Now there was leaning on Jesus’ bosom one of his disciples, whom Jesus loved.

13:24

Simon Peter therefore beckoned to him, that he should ask who it should be of whom he spake.

13:25

He then lying on Jesus’ breast saith unto him, Lord, who is it?

Personally, I think there was something incestuous between you and your cousin John.  However, that may have been a case of two queens… err…. kings competing.

JESUS:

You seem to equate “love” with sex and two bodies touching as something sexual. When you are pure of heart you don’t even consider that you would have to adjust your writing to avoid being thought perverse.

GARY:

Pure of heart????  A lot of time not documented from when you were 13 (a brat the way spoke back to your mother!  “…I’m about my father’s business.”  — had you been my child, you would have received a smack!) and the age of 30.

JESUS:

Everyone has to grow and develop. You are talking to an enlightened being and saying, “When you were five you burned ants with a magnifying glass.” It’s ludicrous. And as much as you criticize Christianity, you seem to be grabbing onto the same nonsense that I had no growth but came in fully enlightened, which is not the case. I came in more “ripe” than most but like a fruit on the tree, I still had to ripen before being released from the branch.

GARY:

What was with your arrest and Judas giving you the kiss of death?  What KIND of party was going on????

JESUS:

A “kiss” seems to be taken by you as sexual again. Knowing you are fond of French culture, let me ask you: When you kiss a woman–or man–once on each cheek, is there something “sexual” about this?

GARY:

No….  Of course not.  But, wontonly laying my head upon someone’s chest (and scantily clothed I might add) does!

JESUS:

You take your present understanding of “lying with your head against another’s bare chest” and apply it to me and my time and think you have an understanding.

GARY:

NOW, exactly what were you saying when

Mark 7:15

“There is nothing from without a man, that entering into him can defile him.”

a little racy don’ cha’ think?

JESUS:

You see “entering into [a man]” as something sexual once again. I was merely sharing that the spirit cannot be defiled by earthly things.

GARY:

Sounds like a line from David Koresh.  “Come here little girl.  Let’s share a cookie…”

JESUS:

I’m guessing you know about as little of David Karesh as you do of me. In the case of David Karesh, your knowledge is from biased news media. In the case of me, it is from misunderstood, limited or intentionally manipulated understandings from the church and then your social and intellectual conditioning filtering that and countering with its own bias. You’ve missed me. And the sad thing is, you think everyone else has. Rather than finding me, your goal should be to find yourself. You will never do so hiding behind intellectual debate and ignoring your shadow.

GARY:

Like who was the naked (rather scantily clothed–got to get it right), boy who was around you?  Mark 14:51-52 Sounds like you are an authority on this pedophile subject….

And there followed him a certain young man, having a linen cloth cast about his naked body; and the young men laid hold on him:

And he left the linen cloth, and fled from them naked.

JESUS:

“The young man and the linen cloth”…It is symbolic that through truth, love, understanding one’s essence–or as the modern Christians would say, through me–one no longer needs to cover oneself of even the last layer of deception.

GARY:

…”and have another cookie little girl.  I will take you to a state of grace…”

JESUS:

Your questions indicate your own predilections and not my own. I will be brief but I do suggest that you would be able to use any text to find your own shadow side reflected.

GARY:

mmph!  Very “republican!”  Deflect from the issue and questions at hand.  Displace blame and make the interviewer the crazy one.  …As if it is sinful to question someone who claims to raise the dead; walk on water; feed 5000 with 2 fish and five loaves; part seas… oh yeah that was your daddy! …

JESUS:

I did not deflect any “issues”–I directly answered the questions. If you see a cucumber and think, “Penis,” and then see a pencil and think, “Penis,” and then see a race car and think, “Penis,” perhaps you ought to check into your own thinking. It is easy to cherry pick any phrase and take it out of context and make some claim as to what it means. Funny that the only cherries you picked were sexual and usual gay. Let me guess, you’re gay and you have sexual deviancies that you are not always comfortable sharing but do so by your own “deflection” in mentioning such deviancies from scripture?

Your very statement, “Is it sinful to question…” implies that the answers I have given you made questioning wrong. This is you doing just what you accused me of doing, but in this case making the “answerer” the “crazy one.”

GARY: Anyway….Let’s look at the crucifixation.  It is written in John 19:26 (Clearly John was willing to tell it!)

When Jesus therefore saw his mother, and the disciple standing by, whom he loved, he saith unto his mother, Woman, behold thy son!

…like where were your other bretheren?

JESUS:

I did love John dearly and was telling my mother that love is not just by blood by by spirit, that we are all sons and mothers, be it of God or of Man.

GARY:

Okay, and where was Peter, Matthew, Mark, Thomas, Andrew, James, Bartholemew, Simon, …hmmm, I forget the other 3 (not 4) because I could understand you having issues with Judas?  Do they not get to share the “spiritual love” too?

JESUS:

John and I shared past lives where we were intimate, and by “intimate” I don’t mean we had a gay love affair. Your logic is that if something or someone isn’t mentioned that means they were intentionally neglected. Sometimes I would use a single example to express an overall theme. My mother was not in a receptive enough mode for me to list every single person known and unknown.

I had no “issues” with Judas. You once again read things through Christian dogma and claim yourself immune to the poison of brainwashing. Your understanding of my relationship with Judas is based on hearsay. For hundreds of years Mary Magdalene was called a whore by the church. Another completely made-up tale to put the role of women down in the Christian hierarchy. She was closest to me and received–and understood–the most of any of the disciples. This was in part because she was “ripe” and also in part because, being a woman, she was more in touch with the feminine aspects of herself, the very nature that I was trying to help people reassimilate.

GARY

…and finally, if you were known to do what I think you were doing…. the form of punishment…. CRUCIFIXTION!

So, up next… your fish story!

JESUS:

I don’t even understand your query on crucifixion. That was a common form of punishment then. The cross also has a lot of symbolism to it.

GARY:

As for crucifixation–You had to be special

9Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders 10nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.

So!  We know you were not a thief, greedy, a drunkard, a slanderer, idolater, or a swindler….

THEREFORE… when Pontius Pilate asked:

23″Why? What crime has he committed?” asked Pilate.

But they shouted all the louder, “Crucify him!”

….Well, sexually immoral, male prostitute, or homosexual offender, is what’s left.

…..PICK!

JESUS:

If you want to be literal on the crucifixion story, why was a murderer and a common thief also being crucified with me? Was common thievery something that delineated this man as “special”? Part of that story was to illustrate that at any time one can drop all their baggage and enter the kingdom of Heaven–and so I don’t have to respond to your misunderstanding of what “Heaven” is based on church doctrine and then your intellectualizing how silly they are to make yourself feel somehow better, Heaven is not a location but a state of being…full awareness, union with the One that is, with all.

Pilate was not going to crucify me but like many of the politicians of today, he was a career politician and played to the stirrings of the masses who were convinced by the pharisees that I said that I was the messiah and committed blasphemy. I was, in fact, the messiah, but not in the limited, dogmatic way that the Hebrews believed a messiah to be–to raise all the dead and to create a Heaven on earth–but to share the opportunity to raise the consciousness of the planet on a grand scheme.

Everything in this reality is opportunity. No messiah or guru or teacher is going to do the work for you. Instead he will point the way. Funny how man refuses to take the steps down the path based on fear and laziness and then blames the man who has worked hard for his own understanding and only wants to make it easier for his brothers and sisters.

When you are connected to Truth, or you may call it “God,” you don’t have to memorize answers; they are always available. I am afraid all my teachings are about transforming the man, not memorizing more useless “law.” You have not worked on transforming yourself and so, like most, you try to apply your own understandings to what I have said and what is written about me and thereby miss me.

GARY:

…and wasn’t that your purpose of/for coming here anyway?  Or, being here?  That you are an example for the rest of us to show that we mortals can do as you do?   …Or, to use your term–”shadow?”

JESUS:

My purpose was to live my destiny, not to serve some role for you or anyone else. Part of my destined path had to do with awakening people from superstition to Truth. Most were not ready. Perhaps you should dig deeper into some of my parables, such as the one where I talk about throwing seeds on the ground and that some will land on the rocks and not find soil and how some will be trodden upon and destroyed and how only a smaller group will find soil and grow. You will probably make this into some homoerotic “proof” instead. If what you might call the “simple” people are the ones that get trodden upon and destroyed, you are the one that lands on the rock–thinking you’re whole and complete as a seed, intellectualizing that you are a great tree, not realizing that without immersing yourself in the soil, you will never grow to your full potential.

I used “shadow” to mean accepting our “darker” sides that most of us suppress and don’t accept into the whole, not to follow me around like a shadow. You should create your own shadows with your light, not remain in the darkness behind me.

I am tired of debating with you over trivia. You will never understand me by trying to decipher words. My shem, my spirit, my energy, my name, is available to you but you are closed off to it and no amount of brainpower or memorized scripture will ever bring you closer to me. So you don’t, once again, misinterpret me, by “closer” I don’t mean that I will care more about you–I already love you dearly–but closer to my energy, my understanding, my essence. Everything I did you can do and more. But instead of “doing,” you will probably sit on your ass and criticize others. Your arguments are so devoid of [understanding] that it is clear that you prefer philosophical masturbation to actual self-discovery.

When I talk about “the Father” I am not talking about a God “out there” but a dropping of the ego and creating the space inside to fill with your natural state. Your space is filled with your ego. And thinking itself so “intellectual,” it will resist stepping aside and just residing in allaha, the sacred unity of all.

Do know that I can see your spirit and know you and that is why I lashed you with logic and directness; it is the limited capacity that you have available to listen with. When you drop your ego and the ideas from others that you have used to bolster your ego, you will finally be able to hear me without any filters. And then we will be One. For now I am done answering questions which really don’t seek answers and are only designed to bolster your ego. Enough for today.